From: Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@canonical.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Cc: Mario Limonciello <Mario.Limonciello@dell.com>,
Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>,
Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>,
linux-nvme <linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Rajat Jain <rajatja@google.com>
Subject: Re: [Regression] Commit "nvme/pci: Use host managed power state for suspend" has problems
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2019 18:55:51 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <43A8DF53-8463-4314-9E8E-47A7D3C5A709@canonical.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0jmO4FMOVYs62wkvPrUW81scD2H7cJyRc+tfoj+vODVbQ@mail.gmail.com>
at 06:26, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:05 PM <Mario.Limonciello@dell.com> wrote:
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org>
>>> Sent: Thursday, August 1, 2019 12:30 PM
>>> To: Kai-Heng Feng; Keith Busch; Limonciello, Mario
>>> Cc: Keith Busch; Christoph Hellwig; Sagi Grimberg; linux-nvme; Linux
>>> PM; Linux
>>> Kernel Mailing List; Rajat Jain
>>> Subject: Re: [Regression] Commit "nvme/pci: Use host managed power
>>> state for
>>> suspend" has problems
>>>
>>>
>>> [EXTERNAL EMAIL]
>>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 11:06 AM Kai-Heng Feng
>>> <kai.heng.feng@canonical.com> wrote:
>>>> at 06:33, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 12:22 AM Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org> wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 11:25:51PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>>>>> A couple of remarks if you will.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> First, we don't know which case is the majority at this point. For
>>>>>>> now, there is one example of each, but it may very well turn out that
>>>>>>> the SK Hynix BC501 above needs to be quirked.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Second, the reference here really is 5.2, so if there are any systems
>>>>>>> that are not better off with 5.3-rc than they were with 5.2, well, we
>>>>>>> have not made progress. However, if there are systems that are worse
>>>>>>> off with 5.3, that's bad. In the face of the latest findings the
>>>>>>> only
>>>>>>> way to avoid that is to be backwards compatible with 5.2 and that's
>>>>>>> where my patch is going. That cannot be achieved by quirking all
>>>>>>> cases that are reported as "bad", because there still may be
>>>>>>> unreported ones.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have to agree. I think your proposal may allow PCI D3cold,
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, it may.
>>>>
>>>> Somehow the 9380 with Toshiba NVMe never hits SLP_S0 with or without
>>>> Rafael’s patch.
>>>> But the “real” s2idle power consumption does improve with the patch.
>>>
>>> Do you mean this patch:
>>>
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/70D536BE-8DC7-4CA2-84A9-
>>> AFB067BA520E@canonical.com/T/#m456aa5c69973a3b68f2cdd4713a1ce83be5145
>>> 8f
>>>
>>> or the $subject one without the above?
>>>
>>>> Can we use a DMI based quirk for this platform? It seems like a platform
>>>> specific issue.
>>>
>>> We seem to see too many "platform-specific issues" here. :-)
>>>
>>> To me, the status quo (ie. what we have in 5.3-rc2) is not defensible.
>>> Something needs to be done to improve the situation.
>>
>> Rafael, would it be possible to try popping out PC401 from the 9380 and
>> into a 9360 to
>> confirm there actually being a platform impact or not?
>
> Not really, sorry.
>
>> I was hoping to have something useful from Hynix by now before
>> responding, but oh well.
>>
>> In terms of what is the majority, I do know that between folks at Dell,
>> Google, Compal,
>> Wistron, Canonical, Micron, Hynix, Toshiba, LiteOn, and Western Digital
>> we tested a wide
>> variety of SSDs with this patch series. I would like to think that they
>> are representative of
>> what's being manufactured into machines now.
>
> Well, what about drives already in the field? My concern is mostly
> about those ones.
>
>> Notably the LiteOn CL1 was tested with the HMB flushing support and
>> and Hynix PC401 was tested with older firmware though.
>>
>>>>>> In which case we do need to reintroduce the HMB handling.
>>>>>
>>>>> Right.
>>>>
>>>> The patch alone doesn’t break HMB Toshiba NVMe I tested. But I think
>>>> it’s
>>>> still safer to do proper HMB handling.
>>>
>>> Well, so can anyone please propose something specific? Like an
>>> alternative patch?
>>
>> This was proposed a few days ago:
>> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-nvme/2019-July/026056.html
>>
>> However we're still not sure why it is needed, and it will take some
>> time to get
>> a proper failure analysis from LiteOn regarding the CL1.
>
> Thanks for the update, but IMO we still need to do something before
> final 5.3 while the investigation continues.
>
> Honestly, at this point I would vote for going back to the 5.2
> behavior at least by default and only running the new code on the
> drives known to require it (because they will block PC10 otherwise).
>
> Possibly (ideally) with an option for users who can't get beyond PC3
> to test whether or not the new code helps them.
I just found out that the XPS 9380 at my hand never reaches SLP_S0 but only
PC10.
This happens with or without putting the device to D3.
Kai-Heng
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-02 10:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 75+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-25 9:51 [Regression] Commit "nvme/pci: Use host managed power state for suspend" has problems Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-07-25 14:02 ` Kai-Heng Feng
2019-07-25 16:23 ` Mario.Limonciello
2019-07-25 17:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-07-25 17:23 ` Mario.Limonciello
2019-07-25 18:20 ` Kai-Heng Feng
2019-07-25 19:09 ` Mario.Limonciello
2019-07-30 10:45 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-07-30 14:41 ` Keith Busch
2019-07-30 17:14 ` Mario.Limonciello
2019-07-30 18:50 ` Kai-Heng Feng
2019-07-30 19:19 ` Keith Busch
2019-07-30 21:05 ` Mario.Limonciello
2019-07-30 21:31 ` Keith Busch
2019-07-31 21:25 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-07-31 22:19 ` Keith Busch
2019-07-31 22:33 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-01 9:05 ` Kai-Heng Feng
2019-08-01 17:29 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-01 19:05 ` Mario.Limonciello
2019-08-01 22:26 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-02 10:55 ` Kai-Heng Feng [this message]
2019-08-02 11:04 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-05 19:13 ` Kai-Heng Feng
2019-08-05 21:28 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-06 14:02 ` Mario.Limonciello
2019-08-06 15:00 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-07 10:29 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-01 20:22 ` Keith Busch
2019-08-07 9:48 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-07 10:45 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-07 10:54 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-07 9:53 ` [PATCH] nvme-pci: Do not prevent PCI bus-level PM from being used Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-07 10:14 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-07 10:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-07 14:37 ` Keith Busch
2019-08-08 8:36 ` [PATCH] nvme-pci: Allow PCI bus-level PM to be used if ASPM is disabled Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-08 8:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-08 9:06 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-08 10:03 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-08 10:06 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] PCI: PCIe: ASPM: Introduce pcie_aspm_enabled_mask() Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-08 13:15 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2019-08-08 14:48 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-08 10:10 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] nvme-pci: Allow PCI bus-level PM to be used if ASPM is disabled Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-08 13:43 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2019-08-08 14:47 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-08 17:06 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-08 18:39 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2019-08-08 20:01 ` Keith Busch
2019-08-08 20:05 ` Mario.Limonciello
2019-08-08 20:41 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-09 4:47 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2019-08-09 8:04 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-08 21:51 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-08 21:55 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] PCI: PCIe: ASPM: Introduce pcie_aspm_enabled() Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-09 4:50 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2019-08-09 8:00 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-10-07 22:34 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2019-10-08 9:27 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-10-08 21:16 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2019-10-08 22:54 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-10-09 12:49 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2019-08-08 21:58 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] nvme-pci: Allow PCI bus-level PM to be used if ASPM is disabled Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-08 22:13 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] " Keith Busch
2019-08-09 8:05 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-08-09 14:52 ` Keith Busch
2019-07-25 16:59 ` [Regression] Commit "nvme/pci: Use host managed power state for suspend" has problems Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-07-25 14:52 ` Keith Busch
2019-07-25 19:48 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-07-25 19:52 ` Keith Busch
2019-07-25 20:02 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-07-26 14:02 ` Kai-Heng Feng
2019-07-27 12:55 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-07-29 15:51 ` Mario.Limonciello
2019-07-29 22:05 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=43A8DF53-8463-4314-9E8E-47A7D3C5A709@canonical.com \
--to=kai.heng.feng@canonical.com \
--cc=Mario.Limonciello@dell.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=keith.busch@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=rajatja@google.com \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).